A Curmudgeon's Notebook — Thoughts on values, education, engineering, politics, civility, . . . . . . . by Don Nordeen

References on Birthright Citizenship

2010 September 09
Last revision:  2011 Jan 08.  Click on History for changes and updates.

    For many reasons, and perhaps primarily because of the new Arizona immigration law, immigration has become a major part of political debate.  Obviously, there are many facets to immigration.  This post considers only the birthright citizenship aspect. 

    Any sovereign nation must have the authority to control its borders and immigration, and do so.  The public policy should be based on the national interest and therefore is the responsibility of Congress. 

    Most Americans including this writer favor legal immigration.  But it must be established by the legislature and enforced by the executive branch. 

    The continuation of this post provides many references concerning birthright citizenship.  Separate posts may deal with the public policy issues. 

Don Nordeen
============
Read the Continuation of this Post and any Comments.
Or Click Show All for the Above Introduction and the Continuation of this Post and any Comments.

• Key Words:  birthright citizenship, immigration, constitution, public policy

---

Prosecution of Terrorism Defendants

2006 September 15

    The continuation is a message I sent to Senators Graham, Warner and McCain with a cc to President Bush.  Personal messages were also sent to Senator Levin, Senator Stabenow and Representative Stupak. 

Don Nordeen
===========

Nomination of Judge Samuel Alito for Supreme Court Justice

2005 December 27

    This post was prompted by another editorial in USA Today using specific, obviously selected, examples of Judge Alito's rulings to support the editorial staff's point of view.  These anecdotal recitations are a small set of snapshots of the career of a judge. 

Don Nordeen
===========

Supreme Court, Judge Roberts

2005 September 11

    The continuation of this post is an email to Mr. Ron Dzwonkowski, editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press, concerning the Free Press Editorial, "Roberts has plenty to answer to in hearings", published on Sep 6.

Don Nordeen
===========

Do Knock Judicial Activism, Think about Women's Suffrage

2005 August 30

    This post is a response to the op-ed by Ms. Carol Towarnicky, chief editorial writer for the Philadelphia Daily News, entitled. "Before knocking judicial activism, think about privacy".  Please read the response in the context of Mr. Towarnicky's op-ed. 

Don Nordeen
============

Before knocking judicial activism, think about privacy

2005 August 29

    The continuation of this post is an op-ed by Ms. Carol Towarnicky, chief editorial writer for the Philadelphia Daily News.  In response to this op-ed, I have posted, "Do Knock Judicial Activism, Think about Women's Suffrage" opining that it is activism by the courts that brings politics into the judiciary.

    I found Ms. Towarnicky's essay refreshing because it focused on underlying issues, rather than reporting or describing the conflicts which are easy to document but aren't very meaningful.  It is difficult to point the television camera at ideas.  But good writing is all about ideas. 

Don Nordeen
===========

Senators on Judge Roberts

2005 August 3

    The evening President Bush nominated Judge Roberts for the Supreme Court, I caught only part of the interviews (press conference) given by Senators Leahy and Schumer.  I searched the internet for a transcript.  Guess who had the transcript  . . . . . . . . . . . . Fox News!  Guess that says something about providing different views.  After browsing/reading the  transcript  (or searching using your favority words), click on your browser's back button/arrow to return to this post. 

    Their remarks are very interesting.  Senator Leahy doesn't want the Supreme Court to overturn legislation he supports.  Senator Schumer repeatedly stated that confirmation depends upon Judge Roberts answering all the questions and providing all the documents requested.  Never mind whether or not it is appropriate for the questions to be asked or for the documents to be requested.  Read Byron York's article in the 2003 March issue of Atlantic "Back to Bork?" with a summary line of "A new strategy of demanding nominees’ views on judicial issues ensures that the next Supreme Court nomination battle will be ugly."  This appears to be an alternate litmus test for abortion. 

    A few senators used to be scholars.  If we don't have any now, it is because we don't elect them.  We get the kind of government we deserve, I guess. 

Don Nordeen
===========

Priscilla Owen

2005 July 6

    In 2002, I had a wide-ranging and interesting conversation over lunch with Mr. Ron Dzwonkowski, editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press.  In the course of that conversation, we discussed judicial appointments, many of which were then stalled in the Senate. 

    We specifically discussed the qualifications of Priscilla Owen, nominee for a Federal Court of Appeals, and then Justice of the Texas Supreme Court.  We discussed whether or not Judge Owen was an activist judge as some were claiming.  We didn't agree, except that we did agree that we both need more information. 

    Subsequently, I conducted some internet research, and made notes of the papers reviewed.  But I didn't write up the notes since Judge Owen's nomination appeared to be permanently stalled in the Senate.  This year I did complete the notes are posted in the continuation of this post.
Your comments are encouraged. Please read my essay on Supreme Court Nominees below or available at Nominees [URL is <http://swagman.typepad.com/essays/2005/07/supreme_court_n.html#more>.].  Click your browser's back button/arrow to return to this post.

DLN
==========

Supreme Court Nominees

Date:  2005 July 6

    What a mess!  Our understanding of the Supreme Court has gotten so far out of whack that the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice has become contentious.  Politics has become more important than preserving/enhancing our republic.  No one seems to be talking about separation of powers and the role of the judiciary.  Conservative and liberal classifications don’t fit the situation.

    For whatever reason, our founding fathers did not define how the constitution and laws should be interpreted.  As a nation, we have probably been trying to define that for over 200 years.  Unfortunately, the press is not very helpful.  They tend to report on controversy rather than substance.  A wonderful exception are two articles in the 2005 September issue of Atlantic:  one by Stuart Taylor, Jr. "Remote Control" with headline "The Supreme Court' greatest failing is not ideological bias — it's the justices' increasingly tenuous grasp of how the real world works." and a second by Benjamin Wittes "Without Precedent" with the leader "Actually, the Supreme Court's problem is not merely disconnection from the real world — it's also arrogance, dishonesty, grandiosity, and a lack of respect for principle, history, or logic."   

    The continuation provides some of my thoughts, mostly in the form of questions trying to frame the problem.  I will add conclusions when I am ready to defend them.  I am interested in your thoughts.  Please add your coments.

Don Nordeen
===========